Orissa High Court
Sumanta Khatua vs State Of Odisha on 4 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL NO.4714 OF 2021
Sumanta Khatua .... Petitioner
Mr. A. Mohanty, Sr. Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. S.K. Nayak, AGA
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE D.DASH
ORDER
04.10.2021
Order No.
02. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement
(virtual/physical) mode.
2. This the successive journey of this Petitioner who is in
custody in connection with Gochhapada P.S. Case No. 28 of
2015 corresponding to G.R. Case No.42 of 2015(PF) pending
on the file of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge,
Phulbani, Kandhamal, running for alleged commission of
offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of the NDPS Act, in
filing this application under Section-439 of the Cr.P.C. for his
release on bail.
3. Mr. Asok Mohanty, learned Senior Counsel for the
Petitioner submits that this Petitioner was not initially named in
the F.I.R. and he has been arraigned in the case at a much later
stage and it is stated that he being the owner of the vehicle in
question was involved in transportation of the contraband ganja
weighing 188.650 kgs. He further submits that this Petitioner
// 2 //
was not present at the spot nor in the vicinity at the time of
interception of the vehicle and seizure and in the first round of
trial, the co-accused persons have already been acquitted by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge,
Phulbani in G.R. Case No.42 of 2015 and there also the finding
as to non-compliance of Section-42 of the NDPS Act has been
rendered. It is submitted that no such material is surfacing on
record to show that the contraband in question had been loaded
from the place of the Petitioner or under his supervision and
that he was having the control over the movement of the said
contraband from the beginning till the time of its seizure.
According to him, in the absence of any such material to
connect the Petitioner with the carriage of contraband in the
vehicle, in any manner, merely for the fact that the Petitioner is
the owner of the vehicle, his liability in the case cannot stand.
He submits that in these facts and circumstances, the provision
of Section-37 of the NDPS Act does not stand on the way of
grant of bail. With all these above, the Petitioner having
remained in custody since the year, 2018; he urges for grant of
bail to the Petitioner as according to him, further detention of
the Petitioner in custody would serve no useful purpose
especially when there remains no material to show that there is
every likelihood of the Petitioner to flee from justice and
tamper the evidence.
4. Learned counsel for the State while submitting that the
order of acquittal passed in favour of the co-accused persons
cannot be taken into consideration in the matter of grant of bail
// 3 //
to this Petitioner who would be facing trial afresh; opposes the
move on the ground of involvement of the Petitioner in the
transportation of commercial quantity of ganja.
4. Taking into account the submissions made; further
keeping in view the materials on records as those stand against
the Petitioner with other surrounding circumstances including
the period of detention of the Petitioner in custody and on
going through the judgment passed by the learned Addl.
Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge; while being inclined to
reconsider the prayer for grant of bail to the Petitioner, it is
directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid
case on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper
by the Court is seisin of the case with further conditions that:-
1. he will appear in person before the Court in seisin of
the case on each date of posting of the case without
fail;
2. will not indulge himself in commission of similar
type of offences; and
3. will report before the IIC, Gochhapada P.S. every
Monday till conclusion of the trial.
Violation of any of the condition(s) shall entail
cancellation of bail.
5. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
(D. Dash),
Judge.
Narayan
